From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SetBufferCommitInfoNeedsSave and race conditions |
Date: | 2007-06-28 22:17:06 |
Message-ID: | 1183069026.3589.13.camel@silverbirch.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 15:29 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane escribió:
> > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > > AFAICS, we can just simply remove the assertion. But is there any
> > > codepaths that assume that after calling HeapTupleSatisfiesSnapshot, all
> > > appropriate hint bits are set?
> >
> > There had better not be, since we are going to postpone setting hint
> > bits for recently-committed transactions as part of the async-commit
> > patch.
> >
> > A quick grep suggests that VACUUM FULL might be at risk here.
>
> That particular case seems easily fixed since VACUUM FULL must hold an
> exclusive lock; and we can forcibly set sync commit for VACUUM FULL.
Exactly what it does!
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-06-28 23:50:55 | Re: lazy vacuum sleeps with exclusive lock on table |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-06-28 22:15:28 | Re: lazy vacuum sleeps with exclusive lock on table |